I wonder if it will be approved.

At 10:56 AM EST I submitted a comment on The New York Times main editorial, “The MAGA WAR on Speech.” The Editorial Board is aghast that the Trump Administration has done radical things such as “The National Park Service (having) erased the letters T and Q: from L.G.B.T.Q. references on its website describing the Stonewall National Monument in New York City.” I responded:

On November 29, 2018, the Times gave OpEd space to Chad Malloy^[1]Chad Malloy is a man male who claims to be a woman who goes by the faux name “Parker” Malloy. to write, “How Twitter’s Ban on ‘Deadnaming’ Promotes Free Speech.” On October 4, 2019, the Times gave OpEd space to Andrew Marantz to claim that “Free Speech Is Killing Us.” When Elon Musk bought Twitter, promising to promote greater free speech, Times Editorial Board member Greg Bensinger told readers that “Twitter Under Elon Musk Will Be a Scary Place.”

The Associated Press’ Stylebook mandates that ‘black’ be capitalized when referring to race, but not ‘brown’ or ‘white.’ More, the AP Stylebook has media all across the country referring to the transgendered by their preferred, fake names and the pronouns of what they claim to be, rather than what they actually are.

The left have been attempting to control the debate by controlling the use of language for as long as I’ve been aware of it.

The internal hyperlinks and the footnote were not used in the submitted comment, because they’d have caused the whole thing to be trashed; I have added them in this article. I took a screen capture of the comment, which was ‘Pending Approval,’ shown at the above right. As of 5:26 PM EST, I have not been able to find it or received the email notification that it had been approved and published.

On January 25, 2021, just five days after Joe Biden became President, the Times gave OpEd space to Candace Rondeaux, a senior fellow with the Center on the Future of War, and Heather Hurlburt, director or New Models of Policy Change at New America, to tell readers what a great thing it was that Twitter deplatformed Donald Trump and Jeff Bezos deplatformed Parler, the conservative alternative to Twitter. The authors then warned us about “right-wing extremists on social media”, “the self-inflicted wounds stemming from an under-regulated, unreformed social media information architecture”, and:

the deplatforming of Parler triggered a virtual stampede to similar forums like Gab and Rumble. Analysts have already documented Parler groups re-forming and spreading evermore hateful content on Telegram and a host of smaller platforms.

As the Parler case study also showed, deplatforming also disappears valuable data. But extremists don’t just vanish — they tumble into “smaller and smaller rabbit holes,” in the words of researcher Peter Singer. Those rabbit holes make up a large, growing and uncontrollable far-right media universe.

Apparently some editor at the Times thought it worthy to present an OpEd which advocates regulation of what we evil “right-wing extremists” say and where we are allowed to say it.

That the Editorial Board recognize the power of directing speech along their desired lines is obvious, and not even subtly so, by one of their listed “Editors’ Picks” in the right hand margin and screen captured on the left in this article, promoting a story about a television show which attempts to normalize transgenderism.

Would the Editors consider an OpEd submission by someone opining that ‘transgenderism’ is a mental illness and a complete fraud being perpetrated on our culture? Would we be allowed to refer to Will Thomas by his real name, or would the author have to submit to calling him “Lia”? Remember: Then editorial page editor James Bennet was fired resigned over his decision to publish an OpEd piece by Tom Cotton, a sitting United States Senator, calling for a military response to the fiery but mostly peaceful #BlackLivesMatter riots protests.

The Editorial Board concluded:

Americans have enormous ability and enviable creativity in finding ways to speak out against Mr. Trump’s repressive and hypocritical speech regime, whether on social media or in the public square. The independence of The Associated Press and other organizations to make decisions contrary to government fiat should be defended and championed. Mr. Trump wants to redefine free speech with bans, bullying and fear. It’s never been more necessary to speak up.

Look to your own house, Board members!

The Times has always been a great defender of their freedom of speech and of the press. When it comes to other people’s, particularly conservatives’ freedom of speech? Not so much.